I like the dashed better. How would one less on the bolding of them look? Also, would it look better to make bremerton extend further east, so cutting off the bottom of silverdale and a little more of the tip of port orchard. The bigger Brem. country would then be easier to stick a number on as well.

Also, all the islands in the south might be confusing since they're not separate countries.

I still don't tell Mt Rainier is a mountain... can't make out that pic. Is it going to be part of a continent or by itself? Maybe make a +1 bonus for holding Mt Rainer and the Space Needle or something like that?

wicked wrote:I like the dashed better. How would one less on the bolding of them look? Also, would it look better to make bremerton extend further east, so cutting off the bottom of silverdale and a little more of the tip of port orchard. The bigger Brem. country would then be easier to stick a number on as well.

I brought Port Orchard down a bit more, and brought Silverdale and Bainbridge Island up a bit. bringing Bremerton out more..

I really hate the ferry routes. They are worse than before. The blue underneath the red with the gaps looks very strange. Especially so in the middle of the map with the darker blue. You should change the style of them. At the least a new colour is needed. Red is not a good choice. Try white, grey or black. But, honestly try out a new style. To put it very lightly, they are distracting to the eye. That's something you don't want.

I'm not sure why there's a killer whale there. I'm assuming they're native to the area, but still you don't want something popping out at you like that. I'd get rid of it altogether, but at the least move it away from the land a bit and reduce the opacity (make it more transparent). Just remove it. It doesn't add anything to the map.

The mountain in the lower right. Why is there a box? Is it really important to the area to have it as a territory? It just seems weird that it's the only mountain there. Is that geographically correct, or are you just placing this one in there? Right now when people see it they won't know if it's part of a continent or not. That's a problem.

I still don't understand why you have 2 different coloured fonts. I don't think you'd even be able to convince me that different continents need either black or white, but some continents have both white and black font. It makes the map look very odd. I'd pick one (black or white) and find out which looks best on everything. Or, play around with it a bit. Try out different styled fonts, with both colours. Maybe add a glow or a shadow to them.

The title being in the middle. I don't think it'll work there. Again it just quite odd. I don't think a title needs to be fancy schmancy, but when you put it in the middle there, you force it to be simple and blend in and I don't think that's good. It should stand out as the title, but not distract from the map. Put it at the top so people see it and say, "Ok this map is called Puget Sound" and then they look at the map. I just think the title and legend should be out of the way of the map itself and not in the middle of everything else.

ed doesn't seem to like variety. I like the whale, it doesn't distract from the map at all. And I think the problem with Mt Rainier is you're trying to put a 3D image onto a 2D map. I still can't make out where the peak even is... it just looks like a blob. maybe make it more cartooney? or appear 3D like King of the Mountains? Not sure what'll work until I see it, so not very helpful I know... lol.

edbeard wrote:I really hate the ferry routes. They are worse than before. The blue underneath the red with the gaps looks very strange. Especially so in the middle of the map with the darker blue. You should change the style of them. At the least a new colour is needed. Red is not a good choice. Try white, grey or black. But, honestly try out a new style. To put it very lightly, they are distracting to the eye. That's something you don't want.

I'm not sure why there's a killer whale there. I'm assuming they're native to the area, but still you don't want something popping out at you like that. I'd get rid of it altogether, but at the least move it away from the land a bit and reduce the opacity (make it more transparent). Just remove it. It doesn't add anything to the map.

The mountain in the lower right. Why is there a box? Is it really important to the area to have it as a territory? It just seems weird that it's the only mountain there. Is that geographically correct, or are you just placing this one in there? Right now when people see it they won't know if it's part of a continent or not. That's a problem.

I still don't understand why you have 2 different coloured fonts. I don't think you'd even be able to convince me that different continents need either black or white, but some continents have both white and black font. It makes the map look very odd. I'd pick one (black or white) and find out which looks best on everything. Or, play around with it a bit. Try out different styled fonts, with both colours. Maybe add a glow or a shadow to them.

The title being in the middle. I don't think it'll work there. Again it just quite odd. I don't think a title needs to be fancy schmancy, but when you put it in the middle there, you force it to be simple and blend in and I don't think that's good. It should stand out as the title, but not distract from the map. Put it at the top so people see it and say, "Ok this map is called Puget Sound" and then they look at the map. I just think the title and legend should be out of the way of the map itself and not in the middle of everything else.

The ferry routes look worse white. As for the style, what is there really besides solid and dashed? and the middle of the map wasn't a darker blue, the water was lighter in the center.

I like the killer whale, they are native to the area. and I should just remove it because you think it doesn't add anything to the map?

The mountain in the corner is geographically correct, it is actually there....not just something I placed..

And where would u suggest I put the title of the map? at the top you say? Because I'm not seeing any room up there...

Last edited by Tisha on Sun Aug 26, 2007 3:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.

you could try small dots instead of dashed lines? I like the black better as it doesn't stand out too much. Now it blends in if you're not looking for them, but you can see them if that's where you're looking. And, that's exactly how it should be for water routes like that. (I hope that clogged wordy rambling made sense)

You might be able to add a bit to the top of the map. Then you can fit the title easier. Or, better yet, just move the text for Granite falls down a bit and put the title there in the top right hand corner.

I'd still reduce the transparency on the orca slightly. I might even move it to that bit of open water right next to the legend?

as for bridges, a simple way to do it that fits with what you have going would be to have 2 parallel lines. Just put them over the area where the bridge goes (eg: I assuming Lakewood to Tacoma or around there anyway) and fill in the top part with the colour of that territory. It looks just fine when you do it that way. On a slightly related note, I'd put lines separating some areas (Lakewood - Gig Harbor) (Camano Island - Arlington) (Port Townsend - Kingston) (Bainbridge Island - Kingston)

Oh in the future would you mind posting the latest version into the post where you mention the update as well as the 1st post? It just makes it easier to follow for me. thanks.

you could try small dots instead of dashed lines? I like the black better as it doesn't stand out too much. Now it blends in if you're not looking for them, but you can see them if that's where you're looking. And, that's exactly how it should be for water routes like that. (I hope that clogged wordy rambling made sense)

You might be able to add a bit to the top of the map. Then you can fit the title easier. Or, better yet, just move the text for Granite falls down a bit and put the title there in the top right hand corner.

Oh in the future would you mind posting the latest version into the post where you mention the update as well as the 1st post? It just makes it easier to follow for me. thanks.

the Lakewood to Vashon route, can you move that to the right a bit to make it longer and more visible? And maybe do something to make the title stand out a bit more? different color/texture maybe? and you need to sign it somewhere eventually!

It's looking good. Is Mercer Island necessary? And any ideas on bridges?

p.s... update the title of the thread to let people know what page the latest map is on.

I like your map...but there are some things that I don't like that much...

-some borders are to straight...as for edmonds and shoreline its ok...but the border between Mason co. and Kitsap Co. looks so unnatural...Can't you just make it like the rest? I think that would look way better...

-You also forgot to draw some black borders, the border between lakewood and Tacoma, you have a river there....you started a border at lakewood but you didn't finished it...maybe it's better to stop it at the river mouth...

-And I don't agree with some bonuses, how did you calculate them?
King Co has 7 borders and has a bonus of 7 (agree)
Snohomish has 3 borders but has a bonus of 4 (disagree)
Pierce Co has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree)
Thurston CO has 2 borders and has a bonus of 2 (agree)
Mason CO has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree, although its hard to hold explanation at Kitsap Co)
Jefferson CO has 2 borders and a bonus of 2 (agree)
Kitsap Co has 6 borders and has a bonus of 7 (disagree much...When you hold Kitsap Co you get a bonus of 7 which is a lot because you can defend Kitsap with only 5 borders...
When you take Allyn and Seattle you can easely prevent some1 to take Masson co because Tahuya can only be fortified along Allyn...and you can afford to put your defense from Bremerton and Bainbridge into 1 territory (Seattle)
I think this makes the gameplay really hard...

lol i just spotted this thread, ur map is looking pretty good for a rough draft.

i guess i will put in some suggestions as well (though i highly doubt u will take them seriously or into consideration)

1. i agree with edbeard, the orca is just not doing it for this map, looks out of place. perhaps look around for a different pic? and if u cant, try edbeard's way, so that it doesnt stick out too much and but can still be a part of the map.

2. MT rainier, it just looks weird. a box in that little corner there. is it really needed? just doesnt fit well with the map so far. looks like a half-ass job, like u just stuck it in a box down there. (no offense)

3. ur rivers seems to be having some kind of problem there. if u look closely, u can see some light blue underneath it, probably the bottom layer of the background, when u put the terrs on top? or is that intentional?

Gnome wrote:I like your map...but there are some things that I don't like that much...

-some borders are to straight...as for edmonds and shoreline its ok...but the border between Mason co. and Kitsap Co. looks so unnatural...Can't you just make it like the rest? I think that would look way better...

-You also forgot to draw some black borders, the border between lakewood and Tacoma, you have a river there....you started a border at lakewood but you didn't finished it...maybe it's better to stop it at the river mouth...

-And I don't agree with some bonuses, how did you calculate them?King Co has 7 borders and has a bonus of 7 (agree)Snohomish has 3 borders but has a bonus of 4 (disagree)Pierce Co has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree)Thurston CO has 2 borders and has a bonus of 2 (agree)Mason CO has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree, although its hard to hold explanation at Kitsap Co)Jefferson CO has 2 borders and a bonus of 2 (agree)Kitsap Co has 6 borders and has a bonus of 7 (disagree much...When you hold Kitsap Co you get a bonus of 7 which is a lot because you can defend Kitsap with only 5 borders...When you take Allyn and Seattle you can easely prevent some1 to take Masson co because Tahuya can only be fortified along Allyn...and you can afford to put your defense from Bremerton and Bainbridge into 1 territory (Seattle)I think this makes the gameplay really hard...

actually i disagree with ur bonus comments, i think her bonus values are fine, u have to also take into account how many terrs it contains that u have to control in order to get the bonus, and in this case, the amount of terrs to entry points suits the bonus values.

wicked wrote:the Lakewood to Vashon route, can you move that to the right a bit to make it longer and more visible? And maybe do something to make the title stand out a bit more? different color/texture maybe? and you need to sign it somewhere eventually!

It's looking good. Is Mercer Island necessary? And any ideas on bridges?

p.s... update the title of the thread to let people know what page the latest map is on.

Gnome wrote:I like your map...but there are some things that I don't like that much...

-some borders are to straight...as for edmonds and shoreline its ok...but the border between Mason co. and Kitsap Co. looks so unnatural...Can't you just make it like the rest? I think that would look way better...

-You also forgot to draw some black borders, the border between lakewood and Tacoma, you have a river there....you started a border at lakewood but you didn't finished it...maybe it's better to stop it at the river mouth...

-And I don't agree with some bonuses, how did you calculate them?King Co has 7 borders and has a bonus of 7 (agree)Snohomish has 3 borders but has a bonus of 4 (disagree)Pierce Co has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree)Thurston CO has 2 borders and has a bonus of 2 (agree)Mason CO has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree, although its hard to hold explanation at Kitsap Co)Jefferson CO has 2 borders and a bonus of 2 (agree)Kitsap Co has 6 borders and has a bonus of 7 (disagree much...When you hold Kitsap Co you get a bonus of 7 which is a lot because you can defend Kitsap with only 5 borders...When you take Allyn and Seattle you can easely prevent some1 to take Masson co because Tahuya can only be fortified along Allyn...and you can afford to put your defense from Bremerton and Bainbridge into 1 territory (Seattle)I think this makes the gameplay really hard...

actually i disagree with ur bonus comments, i think her bonus values are fine, u have to also take into account how many terrs it contains that u have to control in order to get the bonus, and in this case, the amount of terrs to entry points suits the bonus values.

Ok maybe your right about the bonuses...but I still think that the way you can make it some1 really really hard to keep Mason Co and you only make it yourself easier to hold Kitsap is unfair...

Gnome wrote:I like your map...but there are some things that I don't like that much...

-some borders are to straight...as for edmonds and shoreline its ok...but the border between Mason co. and Kitsap Co. looks so unnatural...Can't you just make it like the rest? I think that would look way better...

-You also forgot to draw some black borders, the border between lakewood and Tacoma, you have a river there....you started a border at lakewood but you didn't finished it...maybe it's better to stop it at the river mouth...

-And I don't agree with some bonuses, how did you calculate them?King Co has 7 borders and has a bonus of 7 (agree)Snohomish has 3 borders but has a bonus of 4 (disagree)Pierce Co has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree)Thurston CO has 2 borders and has a bonus of 2 (agree)Mason CO has 4 borders and has a bonus of 4 (agree, although its hard to hold explanation at Kitsap Co)Jefferson CO has 2 borders and a bonus of 2 (agree)Kitsap Co has 6 borders and has a bonus of 7 (disagree much...When you hold Kitsap Co you get a bonus of 7 which is a lot because you can defend Kitsap with only 5 borders...When you take Allyn and Seattle you can easely prevent some1 to take Masson co because Tahuya can only be fortified along Allyn...and you can afford to put your defense from Bremerton and Bainbridge into 1 territory (Seattle)I think this makes the gameplay really hard...

actually i disagree with ur bonus comments, i think her bonus values are fine, u have to also take into account how many terrs it contains that u have to control in order to get the bonus, and in this case, the amount of terrs to entry points suits the bonus values.

Ok maybe your right about the bonuses...but I still think that the way you can make it some1 really really hard to keep Mason Co and you only make it yourself easier to hold Kitsap is unfair...

but think about the amount of troops it takes to take over all the terrs required for the bonus, most players will see the large amount terrs that needs taking over, and would obviously head for small ones with lesser amount of terrs, because they will think it will be easier.

I'd like to keep the county borders true to the area. Mt. Rainier hasn't been just thrown in.. that is the shape of Mt. Rainier National Park.

I'm not sure how your telling me to fix the river....if u do have something better Jako, I would love to see. The light blue wasn't a layer showing through, it was part of the river. I didn't want the river completely one color. I changed it...a little bit of an outline. Is that any better?

And as for Kitsap Co. bonus, I do think it will be hard to hold it with the border of the five. It always is when trying to hold land in other bonuses as your border. Mason can easily grab Thurston Co. and have two extra for a bonus, with the same amount of borders

And I do like the new Killer Whales better. They are native to the land, and want to live on my map.